Talk:Eucharist

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Christianity / Catholicism / Eastern / Anglicanism / Lutheranism / Calvinism / Baptist / Methodism / Latter Day Saints / Adventist / Witnesses (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Catholicism (marked as Top-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy (marked as High-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Anglicanism (marked as High-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Lutheranism (marked as Top-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Calvinism (marked as High-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Baptist work group (marked as Mid-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Methodism work group (marked as High-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement (marked as Low-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist Church (marked as High-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Jehovah's Witnesses (marked as High-importance).
 
WikiProject Food and drink (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
 
WikiProject Greece (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Religion (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Anglican[edit]

@Alexander Domanda: I fear you are making the Anglican section on this article too long. Because this whole article is long, Eucharistic theology was split out as a separate article. It would be better if Eucharist only summarized Anglican Eucharistic theology, and more details are left to Eucharistic theology and Anglican eucharistic theology. tahc chat 14:15, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

I agree. The recent editing has also been too verbose and repetitive as well as containing some personal commentary which has no place in any articles. Afterwriting (talk) 23:30, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Eucharist. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

YesY Archived sources have been checked to be working

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:06, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

"Once and for all": Two issues[edit]

Recent edits which inserted and deleted the phrase "once and for all" raise both a technical issue and a second one as to the contents themselves of the lead section. The phrase "once and for all" and similar expressions were used by protestants to reject the traditional medieval doctrine of the sacrifice of the mass as a genuine sacrifice in parallel or perhaps as a repetition of that of Christ on Calvary. This teaching seemed to protestants to go against biblical evidence found in Hebrews 9 & 10 as well as other places. The Church of England's 1662 Prayer Book says the following of Christ's work on the Cross: "who made there (by his one oblation of himself once offered) a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation and satisfaction, for the sins of the whole world".(Prayer of Consecration) Although the debate has cooled down somewhat, it is still an issue today in interchurch conversations.

The technical issue is the fact that the phrase is part of a referenced quotation. If it is removed then, since the Methodist document includes the phrase and as argued above it is far more than a cliché, another reference must be provided (or at the very least, the justification of the statement transferred to the body of the article).

I myself am inclined to omit the phrase and the reference as being out of place in the lead section of a general article. I would also remove the whole of the comment which follows on "epiousios": it is extremely recondite and speculative. However, for the moment I have limited myself to removing the word "parsed" which is too technical and arguably a misuse of the term. — Jpacobb (talk) 00:37, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

I am in favour of removing the phrase. I would focus on that fact that the phrase is superfluous or unnecessary (the widely accepted view amongst Catholics and Protestants is that the Eucharist remembers Christ's sacrifice - other details are secondary to this). The Methodist catechism does indeed use the phrase, though I doubt a deep theological point was being made in the wording; I expect the editors were merely repeating a cliche. Now the idea that the Eucharist marks a sacrifice is referenced in the article, so often that I don't think a citation is required in the lead. -- --Hazhk (talk) 01:51, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
I am certainly in favor of removing this phrase. It's too perfunctory an expression to impart any information to a reader, and its meaning is not explained at all in the text. As noted above, it's not universal to the various traditions of Eucharist and thus it would require elaboration and qualification, something I'm not seeing as necessary in this context. SteveStrummer (talk) 21:51, 4 June 2016 (UTC)